Why do people persist in voting against their self-interest?

If people voted in their own self-interest, the Republican Party would never come close to getting 1% of the vote. It would fade away into an obscure footnote in history. That will be its destiny, if people make it their business to find out what is going on in this country. The simple truth is the rich and the corporations they own, including the thieving Wall Street banks, are looting this country, eliminating the middle class and enslaving everyone in debt.

Trickle-down economics is not working, never has worked, and never will work. Anyone who believes that it will is willfully ignorant, stupid, or both.

The Republican Party represents the best interests of the 1% of the 1% and they do not give a damn about anyone else. They realize that they have to suppress voting, rig outcomes and convince people to vote against their own best interests or they will never win another election.

Greed is their undoing because they are creating a vast lower class made up of everyone who is not rich. Sooner or later all of us will realize we have more in common with each other, regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Let’s do everything in our power to make it sooner rather than later.

Here’s are two interesting reads about ‘white fragility,’ ‘white privilege‘ and the need to eliminate them.

What do you think?

Previous post

Has the west given up on democracy?

Next post

Scaremongering About the Patriot Act Sunset

Frederick Leatherman

Frederick Leatherman

I am a former law professor and felony criminal defense lawyer who practiced in state and federal courts for 30 years specializing in death penalty cases, forensics, and drug cases.

I taught criminal law, criminal procedure, law and forensics, and trial advocacy for three years after retiring from my law practice.

I also co-founded Innocence Project Northwest (IPNW) at the University of Washington School of Law in Seattle and recruited 40 lawyers who agreed to work pro bono, assisted by law students, representing 17 innocent men and women wrongfully convicted of sexually abusing their children in the notorious Wenatchee Sex Ring witch-hunt prosecutions during the mid 90s. All 17 were freed from imprisonment.


  1. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 3:15 pm

    I got news for you brother, if you think the Democrats don’t also represent ‘the best interests of the 1% of the 1%’, then you aren’t paying enough attention.

  2. May 24, 2015 at 3:25 pm

    Come down to earth and let’s discuss your absurdist thesis, Fred. The Democrat(ic) party has been fully on board with trickle down, monopoly capitalism, aka, neoliberalism.

  3. Screwtape
    May 24, 2015 at 3:32 pm

    Re: “What do you think?” The question is a wee bit behind the power curve, I’d reply.

    That is, absent the eternal shibboleths, why would people NOT vote in their self interest as they perceive it? I think they actually do, but as subjects of paid marketeers, media, etc.

    No one has time to think about causes and consequences nowadays. It’s not the voters’ fault, but it belongs to desperate candidates taking voters for granted, and calculating that way.

    It could be due to voters’ short memories or short attention spans (not necessarily always the same thing IMO). The answer has to do with marketing, I think, which is always there to be exploited.

    Who has noticed the elected PTB revert to their 1% overseers following any election, utterly notwithstanding this or that named party? Anyone doubt the MIC (and some others, similar) has a stake?

    Next time around, it would be fun to gather around some third party, or unaffiliated candidates, especially in swing states.

    None of those will win, of course, but the spectacle of keeping the front runners biting their nails late at night will be worth the effort.

  4. Alice X
    May 24, 2015 at 3:36 pm

    Metanoia Films – Lifting the veil. It’s a little dated but it is good.

    The Democratic Party is where social movements go to die.

    Watch it online.

    And the use of JS Bach’s Erbarme dich laid (just after 1:00:00) over the many crimes of state is stunning.

    I weep for the folly.

  5. Perris Calderon
    May 24, 2015 at 3:51 pm

    “Why do people persist in voting against their self-interest?”

    fox newz

    this has been another installment of “simple answers to complex questions”

  6. mulp
    May 24, 2015 at 3:54 pm

    Republicans since Reagan promise a free lunch and even progressives want a free lunch.

    Both Republicans and Democrats before 1980 tied taxes and spending, with it might be described as Republicans set the maximum they were willing to tax everyone and then spending at least that amount of tax revenue, while Democrats laid out their spending and then tried to raise that much revenue with taxes on everyone.

    Today conservatives and progressives are rabidly anti-tax, and both have big spending plans, just different priorities for spending.

    Progressives will not enthusiastically support the tax and spenders, while conservatives target tax and spenders for defeat. Thus in 1994, the tax and spend Democrats were defeated by anti-tax Republicans, and the only person standing in the way of tax cuts was Bill Clinton who went against the progressives and strong armed the Democrats to pass tax hikes without a single Republican vote. Thanks to the tax hikes of Clinton, spending created jobs because Republicans will spend every dime raised in taxes plus more buying stuff that creates jobs, like roads and bridges.

    Why didn’t progressives vote to defeat Republicans with Democrats?

    Simple, they feared Democrats would hike their taxes to pay for what progressives wanted.

    Obama cut taxes to get Republican support for stimulus in 2009 because contrary to the liars in both progressive and conservative punditry, Obama did not have 60 Democratic votes in the Senate and needed Republican votes, like Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe. But to pay for Obamacare, he needed to hike taxes and require pretty much everyone to pay more. Thus progressives refused to support Democrats because it was clear Democrats would not deliver a progress lunch for free, but would make progressives pay at least something. Meanwhile, conservatives were promising a free lunch – they would get rid of the taxes and the need to pay for health care, and their free market solution would deliver health care fore free.

    Obama and Democrats came up with a kludgy carbon tax, but some Democrats would not hike taxes, and instead of looking for tax hiking Democrats to defeat tax cutting Republicans, progressives looked for free lunchers who would fight climate change without a carbon tax or requiring you pay more for gasoline and pay lots more for an electric vehicle, like a bike. Progressives and conservatives elected tax cutters to Congress who have been blocked by Obama threat of veto.

    Until progressives give up the idea of getting what they want for free, progressives will continue electing Republicans by not voting for tax and spend Democrats.


    Taxes are the price of civilization. As far as I can tell, progressives still retain their Republican roots and opposition to taxes, and the conservatives have simply vowed to always cut taxes.

    When you are ready to pay the price of the government you want, you can convince others to replace Republicans with tax and spenders.

  7. Alice X
    May 24, 2015 at 3:57 pm

    Mulp – there you are again with your free lunch business.

    The Plutocrats are the ones who have the free lunch courtesy of the rest of us who suffer from a regressive tax system.

  8. mulp
    May 24, 2015 at 4:02 pm

    Boy, you have never talked to a Tea Partier. They have defeated tax hikers and big spenders on many occasions in their quest for the free lunch of great roads and bridges and education and health care without taxes delivered by the free market, for free, of course, why else would it be the “free” market?

    It would work except Obama does not believe that things are free in the free market.

    But if Rand Paul is president, then everything will be free in the free market.

    But hey, that is the future progressives demand, just that the government deliver everything for free.

    Democrats simply believe TANSTAAFL – you gotta pay for what you want.

    You clearly do not want to pay.

  9. May 24, 2015 at 4:12 pm

    “Taxes are the price of civilization.”

    That’s such a huge load of counterfactual bull, it boggles the mind.

  10. May 24, 2015 at 4:17 pm

    Mulp, we’re paying taxes out’our arses but instead of roads, all we’re getting is bankers bailouts and endless wars of choice against monsters we create, fer shit’s sake!

  11. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:20 pm

    ““White Fragility,” DiAngelo goes into a detailed explanation of how white people in North America live in insulated social and media spaces that protect them from any race-based stress. This privileged fragility leaves them unable to tolerate any schism or challenge to a universally accepted belief system. Any shift away from that (like a biracial African-American president) triggers a deep and sustaining panic. Racial segregation, disproportionate representation in the media, and many other factors serve as the columns that support white fragility. ” This deserves its own post first problem is group think led by mildly Charismatic but very loud and Persistant people like Rush Limbaugh. On the bright side people like Rush are costing racists money Bain Capital has not been repaying its debt to buy Iheartmedia home of Rush.

  12. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:22 pm

    “This scenario has repeated itself too many times to be coincidence. An 8-year-old child shot and killed by officers while she slept, a 17-year-old killed by police in his own home, a 22-year-old immediately shot and killed in a Wal-Mart, and many more cases of unarmed African Americans immediately getting shot down and labeled as menaces. While on the other side of reality, the Aurora shooter, Timothy McVeigh, and many other armed mass killers were arrested without a scratch on them.”

    Are the police afraid of lawsuits if they shoot a White Guy with a gun or bomb?

  13. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 4:28 pm

    Not news to me, but that’s a different article.

  14. May 24, 2015 at 4:29 pm

    I think that you might find much disagreement with this liberal thesis from the editors at, or from the socialist left in general which is not blind to institutionalized racism, or classism, which such “high minded” musings attempt to sweep under the rug.

  15. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 4:30 pm

    You are incorrectly assuming that I support the Democratic Party.

  16. May 24, 2015 at 4:32 pm

    Then your(?) article leaves much to be desired to even begin to tackle the issue of self interest.

  17. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:32 pm

    ““People who are deeply committed to a world view don’t change their opinions when confronted with new facts,” Wise said. “Oddly enough, new facts cause them to dig in more deeply.”” Emotional reaction sticking head in sand Reasons change desire stays the same the more you tell a teenager No the more they want something the more you reason with them the more they tune you out. Fear, Hate, Jealousy can turn adults into teenagers again provided their approved thought leader (Rush) approves a 5 minute or more Hate

  18. Shutter
    May 24, 2015 at 4:33 pm

    The Republicans are the Daddy wing and the Democrats are the Mommy wing — of the same party.

    But its all one big dysfunctional family. Tough love won out.

  19. May 24, 2015 at 4:35 pm

    MSNBC, CNN, and the entire liberal/illiberal media that would, in order to protect their narrow class privilege, divide and set the working class against itself…

  20. Shutter
    May 24, 2015 at 4:36 pm

    -None of those will win, of course-

    None of those will be *allowed* to win. Da fix was always in.

  21. Screwtape
    May 24, 2015 at 4:38 pm

    “Taxes are the price of civilization. . .” I have to disagree, because it’s not what this is about.

    The result becomes fiat solutions to what people are assumed to want, or what they are supposed to want in order to keep the PTB employed and prosperous — party notwithstanding, once again.

    ACA is a prime example, but not the only one. It backfired spectacularly. It’s ultimate purpose, though, is to shill big pharma and big insurance at the public trough, nothing more. How well educated voters are at that point becomes important for them to vote one way or another. If they don’t like an “approved” explanation, it’s too damn bad, and not their fault.

    Taxes are not about civilization per se. Rather all they do is to sift some money out of the economy to keep it from overheating whenever the Feds need to spend without producing something — not easily defined IMO. The alternative is to simply print still more money, and accept inflation as the “tax.” Not a good result, either. No one will ever get their arms around this.

  22. pelham
    May 24, 2015 at 4:39 pm

    I don’t think the central problem is one related to race or white fragility or a sense of endangered privilege, though these may be secondary.

    Studies have shown that even when confronted with the opportunity for retrospective voting — the theoretical ability to take back a vote they cast for a candidate who betrayed their values on substantive issues — voters are still incapable of making choices that favor their own stated or best interests. Instead, their choices depend solely on how they feel at any given moment.

    In part this may be due to the fact — as others in these comments point out — the Democrats are as fundamentally as corrupt as the GOP. Why not vote superficially if the differences between the only two parties are themselves superficial?

    But I believe a deeper reason may be that democracy based solely on candidates and infrequent elections presents perhaps the worst of all possible worlds, imparting the idea of democracy but little of substance and creating a space for a wide variety of behind-the-scenes influencers to seize effective control.

    We need something finer-grained, a representative democracy that is primarily issue-based rather than party- or candidate-based and invites a degree of participation on a much more timely basis.

  23. mulp
    May 24, 2015 at 4:40 pm

    I gather you are not in the 1%. How many workers to you employ and pay good middle class wages? Why don’t you employ 100,000 middle class workers? Afraid you would be in the 1%?

    If you think the Federal government should pay 100 million people middle class wages, why not run for office starting in your town. Just tell the voters you will put all of them on the town payroll and pay their middle class wages with very high taxes and fees on the citizens of the town. Or don’t you want to pay taxes and fees to government equal to your wages from your town job?


    The “wealth” of the 1% comes from 50 million workers buying shares of the same stock the 1% own, driving up stock prices. If you eliminate all the corporations you eliminate both the payrolls and sales revenue, but also the stock that is the “wealth” you hate of the 1%. You will eliminate the 1% but be the evil 1% of government officials deciding who has a job and how much they earn and how much everything costs. You will be hated because you are personally getting rich off everyone else’s misery.

  24. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 4:40 pm

    ““People who are deeply committed to a world view don’t change their
    opinions when confronted with new facts,” Wise said. “Oddly enough, new
    facts cause them to dig in more deeply.””

    Wise’s comment struck a chord because I’ve seen that all my life and never understood it.

  25. May 24, 2015 at 4:45 pm

    Presumes TINA as some absolute natural law rather than a construct of an unscrupulous sliver of the dismal capitalist elite.

  26. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 4:46 pm

    Fine, let’s imagine what happens if citizens become actively involved in their democracy while making it their business to separate fact from fiction.

  27. mulp
    May 24, 2015 at 4:49 pm

    You have the finer grain democracy of town government, then usually county, then State government.

    Why don’t progressives get involved in town government? You can tax the corporations out of existence in your town and then everyone will be equal, hiring local people to work for them and they then buying from you to pay you to pay wages to those you hire.

    You will want to run the town so it never buys anything from outside the town, unless the town makes stuff that is sold outside the town that generates equal revenue to the costs of imports.

    Note that libertarians voted and decided to takeover New Hampshire and many moved here. But they seem to have discovered TANSTAAFL.

  28. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:49 pm

    “White anti-racists around the country are looking for ways to move more and more White people into effective action against racism and for structural equality.”

    “Founded in 1981, they currently have close to 9,000 members, and they work on environmental issues, voter re-enfranchisement of people convicted of felonies and tax reform for economic justice.”

    Things like this give me hope:)

  29. May 24, 2015 at 4:50 pm

    What would happen is democracy across the board, from workplace through direct and persistently engaged democratic governance.

  30. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:54 pm

    What specifically

  31. ThingsComeUndone
    May 24, 2015 at 4:56 pm

    FDL has been attracting some new people who don’t seem to know us very well yet:)

  32. May 24, 2015 at 4:56 pm

    Propertarianism – there is your core source of free lunch.

  33. May 24, 2015 at 4:59 pm

    Something which MLK recognized, and the probable reason for which he was assassinated, before venturing forth into class war on the side of the working poor regardless of race?

    May 24, 2015 at 5:01 pm

    I don’t vote against my self interest but I do vote against anything some liberal demtard is voting for

  35. May 24, 2015 at 5:01 pm

    Maybe they are not exactly “new” but, rather, some of them, at least, old purged hands?

  36. mulp
    May 24, 2015 at 5:03 pm

    So, you advocate a nomadic hunter-gather society?

    Or the society of North Korea where no one has property but does what the state orders.

  37. May 24, 2015 at 5:09 pm

    How much straw do you keep in the barn between your ears, mulp?

    “Free lunch: Most business is now all about seeking a free lunch, that is, payment for goods or services that have no counterpart in actual costs of producing them. (See Economic Rent and Parasitism.) In order to deter public regulation against this practice, its recipients adopt the cloak of invisibility provided by Milton Friedman’s claim that there is no such thing as a free lunch. His doctrine promotes free markets (q.v.), which open the way for rent-seekers to obtain a free lunch at society’s expense. (See Chicago School.) Michael Hudson

    Rent, economic: The classical term for income that has no counterpart in necessary costs of production, and hence does not add to price, as no out-of-pocket costs are attached to its supply. In Ricardo’s model, landlords possessing the most fertile and best situated soils receive the largest groundrent. It is a free lunch, paid out of prices either set at the high-cost margin accruing to producers producing at lower costs, or as monopoly rent. Its reduction does not lead a production input such as land to be withdrawn, because it is supplied by nature or otherwise extraneously to its recipient’s own efforts.

    Rent, monopoly: Unlike the case with economic rent, monopoly rent adds to price. In agriculture, the idea that landlords receive a monopoly rent as a result of the scarcity of soil (over and above Ricardian economic rent) was formulated by David Buchanan in his notes to Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, although denied in principle by Ricardo.

    Monopolies such as the royal trading companies created by Britain from the East India Company to the South Sea Company were empowered to impose an artificial scarcity. In modern times this is done by technology companies such as Microsoft, which obtains a monopoly rent on software exclusively installed on millions of computers around the world. A similar monopoly rent has been incorporated into intellectual and copyright property law. Today, monopoly rent and groundrent are the major revenue flows that creditors seek to transform into a flow of interest and dividends, as well as to achieve capital gains.

    Rent, tenant: In colloquial speech, people pay rent to their landlords, who use the money to cover the property’s expenses, including the cost of buildings (which strictly speaking is profit), and usually mortgage payments for credit borrowed to buy the property.

    Rent of location: The groundrent resulting from favorable location. In Die isolierte Staat the 19th century economist Heinrich von Thünen distinguished this type of rent from Ricardian rent attributed to inherent soil-fertility differentials. Today, this rent results not only from location as such, but from zoning permission to shift land use from agriculture or “brownfields” to more remunerative forms of commercial or residential suburban use, as well as from public transportation facilities that raise rent on hitherto outlying sites, and lower rents elsewhere by increasing the supply of readily accessible sites. The Erie Canal lowered rents on Western grain-producing lands, while raising rents on upstate New York properties. Railroads likewise increased land prices, as do subway lines, roads and other public transport infrastructure.

    Rentier: Someone living on a fixed income, such as the French rentes, government bonds. What Keynes called a “functionless investor” in his recommendation for “euthanasia of the rentier” (General Theory, p. 376 1961 Papermacs edition, MacMillan & Company). Property rents and interest are the two major modern forms of rentier income. (See Adam Smith, Economic Rent and FIRE Sector.)

    Rentier income: The essence of classical political economy was that no outlay of living or embodied labor is needed to obtain rent and interest. (See Labor Theory of Value.) This analysis offended the vested interests, which sponsored a post-classical reaction by applying the maxim, “If the eye offend thee, pluck it out.” (See Neoclassical Economics.) The ensuing marginal utility theory ignored the wealth addiction that historically has gone hand in hand with rentiers and the tendency for their compound interest demands to approach infinity.

  38. Ruth
    May 24, 2015 at 5:14 pm

    thanks, Fred, it’s a sad result of extravagant use of money and lies, that the majority of voters do not see any factual presentation of their interests, and therefore don’t have a clear idea of the choices they’re making. KochInc funding of Scott Walker, who has lied about his intentions and then betrayed his own word so many times shows their methods as clearly as any event – but much of the media ignores this fact.

    As long as no prevention of fraud that results in economic distress to the majority is enabled, we’re going to be continually worse off. Remember Truth in Advertising? that’s gone by the board a long time ago.

  39. disqus_tu7SEHpgGp
    May 24, 2015 at 5:16 pm

    By your own assertion, at least part of the time, you vote against your own self-interest.

    When you graduate from grade school you might understand.

  40. May 24, 2015 at 5:20 pm

    It has been established by a recent study that in the US the public is governed by a self interested oligarchy. Are you an oligarch, and if not, what self interest do you have in voting for your own enslavement?

  41. Sunny Raines
    May 24, 2015 at 5:24 pm
  42. Sunny Raines
    May 24, 2015 at 5:27 pm

    dude, you’re such an ignoramus – that is such an immature, stupid statement demonstrating your total lack of understanding of how the system works. You and your republican enabling ilk are killing us with your idiocy.

  43. May 24, 2015 at 5:29 pm

    How does the system work, IYO?

  44. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 5:35 pm

    Yep, that’s what I’m getting at.

    Democracy requires hard work all the time by an engaged electorate. God knows the rich hate it. They’re always trying to subvert it.

  45. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 5:43 pm

    One of the reasons I’m back and writing here is I want to recover the people we’ve lost and revitalize the Lake.

  46. Frederick Leatherman
    May 24, 2015 at 5:53 pm

    Ain’t that the truth.

  47. Chris Maukonen
    May 24, 2015 at 5:57 pm

    That is because it’s an emotion based view of reality.

  48. May 24, 2015 at 6:05 pm

    Thanks for the link to the Bach. The woman is strikingly like one of my daughters who could have sung that part, albeit a bit higher….

    Such references as this is just about all that is left at this moment. Music and Camera Work.

  49. Hugh
    May 24, 2015 at 6:09 pm

    As Gore Vidal wrote back in the 70s, “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party …
    and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” Anyone in the 99% who votes for any Democrat or any Republican is voting against both their self- and social interest.

  50. Shutter
    May 24, 2015 at 6:23 pm

    Maybe changing their minds isn’t as important as changing their behavior.

  51. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 7:00 pm

    Republican enabling ilk? You know nothing of me. What I typed is fact. If you magically think Democrats don’t cater to the very same corporate interests (1% of the 1%) that the Republicans do, in spite of the best interests of the populous , then I feel sorry for you. I’m sure you mean well, you need to take off the party goggles. I despise both parties equally. The last time I voted for a president was for Ralph Nader in 2000. Voting for presidents is fucked. If you’re gonna vote do it locally, in your own municipalities/communities. That is the only place where any kind of actual change via voting is even remotely possible.

  52. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 7:08 pm

    I’m not new to this site at all. I love this site. I agree with almost everything on it. It’s a tremendous resource to find a number of different news articles. I always worried whenever it would go down for days at a time, hoping it was just a minor thing and not shutdown or something. I was just simply replying to one sentence in one article that, while I absolutely agree with what was written, I also know it goes the same for both parties and just wanted to comment on it.

  53. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 7:18 pm

    You gather correctly, i’m certainly not in the 1%

  54. Sunny Raines
    May 24, 2015 at 7:35 pm

    more stupidity

  55. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 7:36 pm

    maybe, but there are socialists and progressives on the left and tea partiers on the far right. I doubt people vote against their self interest. Still I agree these days there is no consensus among the electorate, probably having to do with Citizens United among other things.

  56. Sunny Raines
    May 24, 2015 at 7:41 pm

    what you typed is know-nothing self-absorbed bilge. You and the rest of the imbeciles that think like you and know nothing of how the US political system works are exactly why republicans have the power they do in this country.

    You have voted in every election whether you participated or not, and who you voted for is straight republican ticket. You and the other idiots have been played by the republicans – you’re their most trusted and dependable constituency.

  57. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 7:44 pm

    There is a long road to fix the politics but being defeatist won’t help. I like to point to just one thing in 2016: four supreme court justices over 80 years of age. The next President will get to appoint them. Don’t participate and you lost already and will lose all important decisions for the next 25 years.

  58. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 7:49 pm

    And that is why you can forget about ever winning over the deep south, ex Florida. I lived in southern Virginia. Nicest people you could ever meet but they one and all will never vote for LGBT or abortion and so many other things. We need to concentrate where winning is possible. The deep south is as close to a democrat free zone as there is and they were once supporters of FDR.

  59. May 24, 2015 at 7:52 pm

    I’d vote for Hillary against a Mike Huckabee. But if its Scott Walker I would probably vote for Walker. Because my “self interest” would include the candidate who will provide the most economic opportunity and also the best defense of the country against those out there who would kill us all.

  60. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 7:53 pm

    Clinton and Obama to some extent, although they keep pretty quiet about anything they really believe. But not all democrats.

  61. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 8:11 pm

    Actually I know all too well how the system works. You are quite the little name caller aren’t you. All that does is show signs of true weakness. But if that’s what you do best, go ahead and keep at it. The only people being ‘played’ as you put it, are people such as yourself who blindly support either the left or the right. The game is rigged. I trust one day you will finally accept and understand that. At least I hope so.

  62. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 8:22 pm

    Do you think there is any reason to step into a voting booth at all or is it simply useless?

  63. May 24, 2015 at 8:24 pm

    Clinton and Obama to some extent…”

    To some extent? What is that supposed to mean?!

    I thought that an honest adversarial political system would pit warmongers against peaceniks, and capitalists against socialists, i.e.: the right against the left….

  64. May 24, 2015 at 8:27 pm

    Worse than useless.

  65. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 8:36 pm

    As I stated above, I think voting locally in your neighborhood municipalities/communities can have the most real impact. I also very much support voting for whatever referendums that you feel are important to have passed. Aside from that, in my opinion, voting for state governors and congressional representatives is very sketchy but i’m not totally against it. But voting for presidents I feel is pretty worthless, as either candidate will undoubtedly serve those who funded them and got them elected instead of the electorate that they are truly meant to serve. Frankly, i’d rather just write in Monty Brewster or None of the Above.

  66. PillBilly
    May 24, 2015 at 8:39 pm

    “If people voted in their own self-interest…” Jill Stein of The Green Party would be president. The Democratic Party does not represent, or even strive to represent, my interests and values. They are “liberal”, “left” and/or “progressive” only in comparison to the more conservative corporate-coddling bunch than themselves, Republicans.

    I feel fortunate to have diagnosed the true nature of liberal-fraud Barack Obama before 2008, and voted Green Party in 2008, 2012, and likely again in 2016. I even find Sanders and Warren insufficient, as they both roll-over and do whatever AIPAC and the Israel Lobby asks of them.

  67. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 8:41 pm

    I think you need to clarify the title to this post. If a religious person opposes abortion rights and votes that way that is in his interest. We don’t agree but people vote what they feel is their best interest. If we hope to win something we need to engage and find a way around those issues. The democrats are a serious minority in congress and will likely stay that way in 2016 and even at local levels.

  68. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 8:43 pm

    Ok I understand how one can come to that feeling. But if it is all useless why bother talking about it here? Or do you really want something?

  69. May 24, 2015 at 8:46 pm

    I’m sure that in SA, under De Klerk, people talked about it and then did something which ended the apartheid regime…

  70. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 9:02 pm

    It will help if we can make some inroads in local and state elections, including governors. All sorts of things happen there like recently Mike Pence in Indiana tried to legislate his own morality. And then there are things like Medicaid.

    On the federal level we see what happens when the congress is filled with conservatives and little anyone to block them. President as I noted will be very important this time around. Hell, get one of those tea partiers and we could be off to Iran in a wink. So I hope you reconsider.

  71. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 9:03 pm

    What issue do you want to discuss?

  72. May 24, 2015 at 9:04 pm

    Why do people persist in voting against their self-interest?

    Isn’t this clear enough?

    How about you?

  73. Bluedot
    May 24, 2015 at 9:08 pm

    That is the to some extent. There are usually many shades of gray. Those two are mostly on the right and not my ideal candidates. But would I vote in Cruz over HRC? Not likely.

  74. May 24, 2015 at 9:10 pm

    So, why do you persist in voting against your self-interest? Nudge, nudge..

  75. WorkinJoe
    May 24, 2015 at 9:42 pm

    Many of the people aren’t concerned about voting against their best interests. Their intent is to vote against other peoples’s interests.

  76. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 10:15 pm

    I understand where you’re coming from, but being as i’m in northeast Jersey, and with that scumbag Christie getting elected twice (I didn’t vote for him either time) please forgive me if I don’t share your enthusiasm for gubernatorial elections. As far as presidential elections go, I won’t even consider altering my stance on that topic until a viable independent/third party candidate is even allowed into a debate. By the way, sadly, if or when the Iran thing happens, it will be because of the same bullshit fabricated reasons they put to us through the media regardless of whether it be with a war hawk Republican or a war hawk Hillary in office.

  77. Hugh
    May 24, 2015 at 10:51 pm

    Thank you for your deeply, reasoned an insightful argument.

    Doing the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and “Wah, wah, wah, I can’t hear you” is a really powerful argument when you are 3, less so as you get older.

    PT Barnum I believe said you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time. You apparently belong to the latter group.

    Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. You probably qualify for this one as well.

    You would be on stronger ground if you could point to a solid record of Democratic accomplishments, or failing that, a list of occasions where Democrats went to the mat for us, even if they lost. But you can’t. In fact, you haven’t even reached the lesser evilism stage of denial yet. I have been blogging for ten years now. I have been intimately involved in all the major fights and issues. I have heard all the cover your ass arguments, all the half-truths. I have seen the endless parade of revolving heroes and villains, and the only advice I can think to impart to you is inform yourself, question everything, especially your most cherished beliefs. You may learn something. At the least, you will embarrass yourself less often.

  78. Hugh
    May 24, 2015 at 11:07 pm

    If your child needed brain surgery, would you contemplate even for a moment choosing between a bad carpenter and a drunk plumber to perform the operation? No, you would go looking for a brain surgeon. Why then when it is your country, are you content to make an as bad or worse choice?

  79. Sunny Raines
    May 24, 2015 at 11:42 pm

    the only good thing about you self-righteous, head up your arse no-voters is no one gives a crap what you think precisely because you don’t vote – you’re so damn dumb you take yourself out of the system and think anyone is going to care.

  80. Vince
    May 24, 2015 at 11:54 pm

    lol……Wow, you are something else lady. If you don’t give a crap, why do you resort to childish name calling? Is it only to show your lack of comprehension about how fucked the voting system is and how utterly pointless it is especially considering the electoral college part of it where the person who gets the most votes still may not win? Or is there another reason?

  81. Michael Cavlan RN
    May 25, 2015 at 1:45 am


    heh heh heh. Old purged hand here. Got back apparently on accident because of the new system. I will admit that I don’t really visit here very often but it was nice to see you posting here. :-D>—-

  82. Michael Cavlan RN
    May 25, 2015 at 1:48 am


    Excellent points. To see this article and those who try and play the “why do they (Republicans) vote against their own self interests” while refusing to look at or ask the exact same question of Democratic party voters, makes it very clear. Democratic party talking points. Good to see you here.

  83. ThingsComeUndone
    May 25, 2015 at 11:54 am

    I never understood it either it seems the negative emotions can over ride logic Lizard Brain take over which happens to everyone in a crisis but to stay in fight or flight mode for years? Yes Adrenaline Junkies exist but even junkies have rational thoughts sometimes unless they lose their sanity all together. A psych profile of conservative brains might provide an explanation.

  84. caleb36
    May 25, 2015 at 3:38 pm

    At the same time as they invest gazillions in the stock and derivattives markets, the very wealthy are sucking money out of the economy for everyone else. As prices are not decreasing, and in fact there is rampant inflation in some areas (notably higher education and health care), this means that slowly, the bulk of the U.S. population is being financially strangled and turned into lifetime debt slaves. The vice is also being put on our kids as education policy-makers cut back on recess, try to eliminate all fun and real learning, and institute a system of teaching to the standardized tests. My wife is a teacher and tells me that many of these kids can’t pay attention in class because they’re hungry. Their only real meals are free lunches provided by the schools, and who knows how long these will last, with Congress in a frenzy to cut food stamps.

    The forced purchase of crummy health insurance with huge deductibles under the ACA is another part of our financial strangulation. (It’s really not surprising that Justice Roberts voted to uphold this legislation). Also part of the strangulation process is forcing everyone to conduct transactions by i-phone and computer, which adds hundreds of dollars to monthly bills.

    A person with a middle income and a family simply CAN’T keep up financially. (I earn a nice middle-class income in an area with comparatively reasonable costs, have a one-child family, and still am constantly falling behind slightly, living very frugally.) The majority of the population with lower incomes eventually falls under the thumb of ruthless debt collectors, and this is quite deliberately planned. All of this makes sense when you realize that the neo-Confederates have taken control of our government, and are seeking to re-institute a system of modern slavery, this time not limited to African-Americans.

  85. dick_c
    May 25, 2015 at 5:49 pm

    It seems that what’s most important to the conservative brain is that it knows what to avoid, and who it’s enemies are, regardless of evidence. Fight or flight doesn’t come with a “let’s see if there’s another alternative” option. I think Fox News knew this, and realized it could easily turn some of those who opposed the old Republican party positions into Republicans by magnifying wedge issues–like guns and abortion–until those issues were more important than the bank that was cheating people out of their homes, or factory owners who wouldn’t pay fair wages.

  86. May 25, 2015 at 6:07 pm

    “All of this makes sense when you realize that the neo-Confederates have taken control of our government, and are seeking to re-institute a system of modern slavery, this time not limited to African-Americans.

    Accepting your premise, the question remains: what good is the Dem party when it cannot/will not protect the working class from said “neo-Confederate” hicks?

  87. Istherenonamethatdoesntexist
    May 27, 2015 at 11:23 am

    Who invented “white privilege” to describe why some people are better than you?

  88. May 28, 2015 at 3:54 pm

    Because in your scenario, Hillary would like be

    Sent from AOL Mobile Mail

  89. May 28, 2015 at 3:55 pm

    Because in your scenario, hiring Hillary would be like hiring a fake doctor. Would you let a fake doctor perform surgery on your child?